alant
Full Member
Posts: 129
|
Post by alant on Jan 17, 2021 8:56:14 GMT -6
I compressed the Game6 folder using 7-Zip but have no idea where that ends up. Here is what I got searching the Game6 folder for "bret". I could send you some/all of these if that helps. My idea was to look at each of the 3 ships in that class. Two of them have no issue, so I would edit the odd one to be like one that has no issues.  |
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jan 17, 2021 12:45:05 GMT -6
I compressed the Game6 folder using 7-Zip but have no idea where that ends up. Here is what I got searching the Game6 folder for "bret". I could send you some/all of these if that helps. My idea was to look at each of the 3 ships in that class. Two of them have no issue, so I would edit the odd one to be like one that has no issues. View AttachmentThe one that says R(1931) is the corrupted file I think |
|
alant
Full Member
Posts: 129
|
Post by alant on Jan 18, 2021 15:32:11 GMT -6
Okay, what do I do?
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jan 18, 2021 15:55:23 GMT -6
|
|
alant
Full Member
Posts: 129
|
Post by alant on Jan 18, 2021 23:25:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jan 21, 2021 21:48:39 GMT -6
Are the parentheses missing in your file name too? In any case, this file is corrupted, most of the values are null. If its messing with your game change the ship class to one of the other rebuilds in the save file |
|
alant
Full Member
Posts: 129
|
Post by alant on Jan 22, 2021 15:09:55 GMT -6
The .61d file name has parentheses, as shown in the photo with all 4 .61d files.
I'll change the ship class, to avoid any possible errors.
|
|
|
|
Post by exltcmts on Apr 9, 2021 2:51:31 GMT -6
V1.0 is released All nation's starts are complete with all 7 fleets complete in each one Any feedback? Just some minor data issues - Tonnage figures are neither standard displacement, nor light displacement, nor trials displacement nor full load. Given you are starting with the Washington Treaty in effect, standard displacement should be used. South Carolina and Michigan had been de-commissioned before the Treat went into effect, 15 Dec 1921, 11 Feb 1922. These days when a ship was "decommissioned", there was no "mothballing". The ship was pulled up to a pier in a yard or base, the tompions put in the guns, maybe canvas stretched over the stacks and ventilators, the doors, windows and ports dogged and the crew re-assigned. Any outstanding maintenance and repairs were documented and the funds turned off. Congress started cutting funding right after the war and funds and crews were needed for the new generation of ultra-dreadnoughts. Someone would come by everyday to make sure the ship was still afloat. Within a year, the ship would require a good deal of extra maintenance before it could be put back into service. Such ships would become parts stores quickly. As far as these two ships and the pre-dreadnoughts, they retained little or no combat value in a world of 45,000 ton ultra-dreadnoughts with 16" and 18" guns and there were plenty of war built merchant ships to use as auxiliaries. In time of war, their steel would be more valuable than the ships. All these ships were scrapped in 1923 without a tear drop. Delaware and North Dakota were declared at 20,000 standard tons. Florida and Utah at 21,825 st. Wyoming and Arkansas at 26,000 tons. Looking back, it just doesn't make sense why the Navy kept these ships. The two possible opponents had battle lines with 13.5" and 14" guns with elevations of at least 20 degrees. They were out-gunned in shell weight and range. The US delegation at Washington should have been negotiating someway to trade them, say at a 2 to 1 tonnage ratio for Washington. They were little better than obsolescent. What was worse was that the Navy then spent precious funds to rebuild the last four, even when they didn't increase gun elevation to at least 30,000 yards, which became standard for the rest of the battle line. New York and Texas at 27,000 tons. Both could make but not sustain 21 knots for more than eight hours due to their VTE machinery. Though they had VTE, their pre-"all or nothing" armor scheme and lack of gun elevation made them less valuable. In 1920-21, the Navy studied 'shoehorning' a BB-49 turbo-electric plant into the hull. It just fit lengthwise, but actual gave space on each beam for additional anti-torpedo bulkheads, which meant bulges would still have been needed when they were rebuilt to off-set the additional armor as the TE plant weighed as much as the coal-fired VTE. Had they been given additional gun elevation, they would have been a fast-wing of the Fleet, since they were intended to use only half power normally (~30,000 shp), but full power in war (nominal 60,000 shp, but probably over 70,000 given the performance of the plant in the Lexington and Saratoga), which would have given them at least 25 knots. Nevada and Oklahoma, 27,500 tons. Nevada made 20.5 knots on trial and really was good for barely 20 knots at battle load. Oklahoma made just over 20 knots and was good for 19 knots. Like New York and Texas, her VTE machinery would vibrate to pieces if run at high RPM to long. The Navy had saved the prototype geared turbines from the Delaware when she was scrapped, so why they didn't pull the VTE and drop them in is a question. It would have been a better use of funds than rebuilding Florida and Utah. She would have had slightly better performance than Nevada. The Navy looked at dropping the BB-49 plant into these ships, but they were too small. Still, a half-plant (~33,000 shp) with two shafts should have been possible. These ships introduced the "all or nothing" and the "raft body" concepts. Most people know about the "all or nothing", but the "raft body" was just as important. Essentially the USN armored the sides of their ships to enclose magazines and machinery with belt armor, armored transverse bulkheads and armor decks. The theory was that the ship could flood in her unprotected spaces and still retain enough buoyancy to float and protected machinery to get her back to an advanced fleet base for intermediate repairs. Pennsylvania and Arizona were 31,400 tons New Mexico, Idaho and Mississippi at 32,000 tons, 21 knots, New Mexico had the prototype turbo-electric plant. Gun elevation was still 15 degrees, which meant they and the earlier ships were limited to the visual horizon (22,000-26,000 yards from 100'). Tennessee and California, 32,300 tons. Both were completed and in service. The "ultimate" "Standard" battleship and first of the "Big Five". The improved cage masts could handle the weight of the fire control positions. California had the last "pre-synchro" fire control system. There was a main gun director in the top cupola on each mast, and a secondary director on each beam in the next level down. They were given the first tachymetric AA fire controls in the Mk.19. All BBs had their AA batteries doubled to 8-3" L/50 Mk.10 AA guns and then to 8-5" L/25 Mk.10/11 AA guns when rebuilt or in the late 1920s and early 1930s. They also got a stern catapult and crane in the 1920s and then a second catapult on No.3 turret during the late 1920s and early 1930s. Normal complement was 2-3 observation floatplanes. This was considered an essential mod. Even the unmodified ships could use aerial spotting, when a smoke screen was laid between the opposing battle lines, blinding the enemy. Colorado, Maryland and West Virginia, 32,600 tons. Maryland was in service. Colorado, West Virginia and Washington were due for completion in 1923. As stated earlier, the US should have fought to keep Washington by trading 12" gun tonnage as neither the British or Japanese had 12" gun ships in their battle lines by 1 January 1922. The Treaty ratio could have been used to justify five 16" gun ships and allow Japan three, while letting the Brits build four. The Japanese cheated on the Treaty from the start when the declared Akagi and Kaga at 26,900 tons when they were actually over 30,000 tons standard displacement. Claiming 22.5 knots for the Tosa as they did for the Nagato and Mutsu would allow them to rate Tosa at 35,000 metric tons, perhaps dropping a turret, which with its barbette, machinery and ammo probably weighed in at around 2,000 tons. All battleships carried a fixed TT on each beam, firing the Mk.9 "short" torpedo, 210lbs TNT, 9,000 yards at 27 knots. Also building and scrapped under the Treaty: South Dakota, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina, Iowa and Massachusetts. These ships would have been completed between 1924 and 1925, or perhaps later as Congress was cutting back funding the armed forces. Massachusetts was only less than 12% complete, so maybe she could have been re-armed with 8 x 18" L/50 guns. The prototype gun would have been proofed in 1923-24. Otherwise these ships would come out looking like their final design. The Navy was satisfied with the new heavier cage masts, Colorado and Maryland keeping their's until they were scrapped after WW2. Or she could have traded No.3 turret for longer machinery spaces and a half 'Lexington' plant, ~100,000 shp which might have pushed her 25 knots. These ships came in at around 39,000 - 40,000 tons, standard displacement. One game all the navies played was to design ammo storage for say 120 rounds and then declare 100 rounds as "ready for war". This shaved 240 tons off BB-49. The USN also didn't count the weights of catapults, aircraft and crane as technology not in general use at the time the Treaty was signed. So they also lumped AA fire control in this category. The BB-49 design could have been made to fit 35,000 tons. Drop the No.4 turret, barbette, machinery and ammo and lower No.3 to the quarterdeck. Backing out the protective and armor decks over the hole where No.4 had been and you saved ~3,000 tons. Reduce the ammo loadout, reduce the secondary to 10 x 6" L/53 Mk.12, do a little constructive "book-keeping" and you got in under the Treaty limits and still had your 3,000 tons for mods. Lexington, Saratoga, Ranger, United States, Constellation and Constitution - Around 40,000-41,000 tons standard, 33 knots, 8 x 16" L/50, 16 x 6" L/53, 8 x 3" L/50 AA, 4 x 21" fixed TT on each beam. Fired standard Mk.11, 500lbs TNT, 6,000 at 46 kts, 10,000 at 34 kts and 15,000 yards at 27 kts. Constellation was furthest along at under 23%. They were scheduled for completion between 1925-26, but reduced budgets meant it might be 1926-27. This gave some flexibility for mods, such as going to three three gun turrets, getting an extra gun for the same weight and a reduced length and citadel. Or about 4,000 tons of additional armor could be added, reducing speed by one knot. Keep in mind that the USN did not consider these ships battle cruisers in the sense of the British and Germans. They were "large scout cruisers" which defined their mission. They were to support the "Omahas" and DDs in fighting for information as scouts and deny that information to the enemy. The USN looked at converting them to carriers before the Treaty, as aircraft were steadily taking over the scouting mission, except in bad weather and at night, when such ships would still be needed. The USN in 1922 was very air minded. The NWC had gamed carriers from 1918 in the annual war games, using British information on their carriers and designs. Aerial spotting was considered critical. Battleship floatplanes could do this, but fighters were needed to attain and maintain air superiority so they could operate. Fighters were becoming to heavy for the turret platforms, so flight decks were needed. Bombers came next, as sinking the other side's carriers would go far towards gaining air supremacy. The NWC informed the General Board that the ideal carrier was around 27,000 tons, made better than 30 knots, was armored against and carried 6" guns and carried between60 to 72 aircraft. The Navy requested carriers as their No.1 priority in the 1920 through 1922 budget submissions. The USN was prepared to convert two to carriers even before the Treaty and maybe even more. BB1918 - Congress authorized but did not fund TEN more capital ships in 1918. These would have been around 50,000 tons, 12 x 16" L/50 Mk.1, 13.5 or even 16" belt, Lexington machinery with a speed around 30 knots, laid down after the Lexingtons were launched, in other words between 1922-1924. Certainly these might get tower bridges, 18" guns or other mods. David Brown claims that the Treaty saved the USN from completing twelve ships inferior to their British and Japanese contemporaries. I'm not sure this is true relative to the Japanese, but I admit that it looks true considering the G3 and N3. None of the navies really had good intel on each other's building programs, especially that of Japan. But there were other factors. For the British, they had reached the limits of their shipbuilding. There were only four slips that could build ships the size of G3 and N3 and this is as big as they got. Britain was facing a severe budget and economic problem with its war debt, most of which was held by US banks. The first four G3s would have been laid down in 1922 but were postponed for the Treaty conference. That means they would complete in 1926, with four N3s being laid down in 1924 and completed in 1928. There were only five dry docks in this period throughout the Empire that could support ships of this size. The Japanese were in worse shape as their economy had expanded providing economic support to the Allies and the war was over causing a budgetary and economic crisis. Their infrastructure restrictions were a launch displacement of 40,000 tons and 33 feet draft. It took a massive investment between 1930 and 1937 to improve this to 55,000 tons and 35 feet. The No.13 class was the limit for Japanese capital ships. The Japanese could complete two ships every eighteen months and lost Amagi to the earthquake of 1923. This meant they would, from 1923, complete Kaga, Tosa, Akagi, Takao, Atago, Owari and Kii by 1928. So let's review the situation. In comparison, the US had six slips able to build ships equivalent to the Panama Canal restrictions. The South Dakotas and Lexingtons would be complete by 1927. Six of the BB1918 BBs would be on the slips for completion between 1928-1929, with four more laid down in 1926-27 when the first six were launched. The US would, not including the four Colorados, have built 18 16" gun ships, six of them the BB1918 design by 1929. The British would get four G3 and Four N3 by 1928. The Japanese would have eight by 1929. The US could convert all six Lexingtons to carriers and still have ten 16" gun ultra-dreadnoughts on hand with four building against eight British with four building and eight Japanese with two building. The first No.13 wouldn't complete before 1931. Of the pre-dreadnoughts, all were decommissioned. New Hampshire, Minnesota, Vermont, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Virginia, Georgia, New Jersey, Ohio and Maine were still afloat, but really of little combat value, with the rest having no combat value at all in an "Orange War". Kearsarge was already converted to a crane ship and Kentucky was programmed for conversion. These were all coal burners with VTE machinery. References are Silverstone's "New Navy" and Friedman's "Design History of US Battleships", David Brown's 'Nelson to Vanguard' and 'Grand Fleet' and Conway's Warships series. The monitor Cheyenne had been reduced to a training ship, IX 4, Monadnock was IX 17, the rest were scrapped or rusting pier side. Of the armored cruisers, all had been decommissioned or disposed of. The survivors of the "Big Eight" (Seattle, Charlotte, Missoula (Tennessee class - 15,000 tons, 22 knots, 4 x 10" L/40, 4 x 6" L/50, 10 x 3" L/50 SP, 2 x 3" L/50 AA and 2 x 21" TT, Huron, Frederick, Pueblo, Huntington and Pittsburg (Pennsylvania class - 14,300 tons, 22 knots (reduced for Pittsburg to 13,700 tons, 18 knots at 18 knots) 4 x 8" L/45, 4 x 6" L/50, 10 x 3" L/50 SP, 2 x 3" L/50 AA, 2 x 21" TT)) were still afloat. Pueblo was a receiving ship, Huron was the Asian Sqdn flagship, 1919-1926 and then Pittsburg, 1927-1931. Pittsburgh had her forward funnel and boilers removed, down to 18 knots in 1927. All but Seattle were gone by 1931, with Seattle as IX 39. Rochester (CA-2) was off Nicaragua from 1926-31 and in the Far East from 1932-33, being stricken in 1938 and used as block ship in Subic Bay in 1941. She displaced 8,500 tons until 1924 when she lost her forward funnel and boilers, reducing speed from 20 knots to 16. 4 x 8" L/45 Mk.6, 8 x 3" L/50 Mk.9, 2 x 3" L/50 AA until 1924, when the SP 3" were removed. The Japanese did pretty much the same to their armored cruisers with improved guns, reduced boilers and speed and use as flagships and fire support off the Chinese coast. The USN seriously considered rebuilding these ships with bulges, new oil-fired machinery (speed 26-27 knots), tripods, new fire control and increased turret elevation, 30 degrees, pushing max new gun ballistic range to 30,000 yards. All 3" would be removed, Mk.19s shipped along with 8 x 5" 25 AA. These ships did not count against the Treaty. Of the "protected" cruisers, Charleston (CA-19), 10,300 tons, 22 knots, 12-6" L/50, 4- 3" L/50, 2 - 3" L/50 AA (St. Louis was decom, both were gone by 1930); Galveston (CL-19), Tacoma (CL-20, lost in 1924), 3,300 tons, 16.5 knots, 8-5" L/50, 1-3" L/50 AA (Denver, Chattanooga, Des Moines, Cleveland were decom, all were gone by 1933); Albany (CL-23) 3,600 tons, 20 knots, 8-5" L/50, 1-3" L/50 AA (decom in 1922, joining New Orleans, both gone by 1930), Olympia (CL-15), 6,100 tons, 20 knots, 4-8" L/35, 10-5" L/51 were still in service. Baltimore (12 x 6" L/40, 6 x 3" L/50 SP, 250 mines, 4,500 tons, 18-19 knots, stricken 1937) and San Francisco (4,500 tons, 19 knots, 8 x 5" L/51, 300 mines, renamed Yosemite in 1931, stricken 1937) were converted to cruiser-minelayers (CM), were decom. Scout cruisers included the ten Omaha class, all still building at this point, completing in 1923-25, 7,050 tons, 33-35 knots,12 x 6" L/53, 4 x 3" L/50 AA, 10 x 21" TT (2 x 3 deck mounts, 2 x 1 fixed either beam). Received two catapults and two scout floatplanes in the late 1920s and the fixed TT removed. Chester, Salem and Birmingham were decom, 4,100 tons, 25-26 knots (Birmingham had VTE and struggled to get to 24 knots), 4 x 5" L/51, 2 x 3" L/50 SP, 1 x 3" L/50 AA, 2 x 21" fixed TT. Langley was in commission and Lexington and Saratoga on the stocks. |
|
|
|
Post by exltcmts on Apr 9, 2021 7:06:22 GMT -6
The monitor Cheyenne had been reduced to a training ship, IX 4, Monadnock was IX 17 (scrapped in 1923), the rest were scrapped before end of the 1922.
There was a follow on design for the "Omahas" with 8 to 12 6" guns in multiple gun mounts, which also folded into the 8" cruiser studies after the Washington Treaty. Scout and light cruisers were always seen as part of the battle line, to support the destroyers against enemy torpedo attacks and support the destroyers when they conducted their torpedo attacks. An interesting attempt to substitute a cheaper alternative to escort the battle line became the "Erie" class gunboats, protected, armed with 6" guns and fast enough to stay with the battle line and unrestricted by the 1930 Treaty.
References includes the Conway World's Warships series (1906-1921, 1922-1945), Friedman's design series for carriers, cruisers and destroyers.
Langley was in commission and Lexington and Saratoga on the stocks. Initially Langley could only operate 12-15 aircraft as each aircraft was brought up from the hanger to launch and each aircraft that landed was struck down before the next landing. Under Capt. Moffett, the deck park was adopted. Aircraft were brought up or retained on the flight deck and parked/staged in the aft area of the flight deck and then launched as a single wave. Then landing aircraft were simply pushed forward to the front end of the flight deck and then, once all aircraft were brought aboard, they were sent to the hanger or restaged aft. Arming and fueling was done on the flight deck. This increased the operational air group to over 30 aircraft. From this point, the USN sized its air group against the available area of the flight deck, where the RN and IJN continued to size their air groups based on hanger space. This is why Ranger could operate 72 a/c and Soryu and Hiryu operated only 50-53 a/c. Ranger was a reaction to the size and tonnage utilization of Lexington and Saratoga and was designed before extensive operations showed the superiority of the large fleet carrier. At one point, Ranger was to be designed and built against the materiel and machinery remaining from the 1916 program, ~27,000 tons standard displacement, over 30 knots, 6" guns and 4-6" belt armor and 72 a/c on a flight deck around Yorktown size. The USN also looked at a conversion of the "Omaha" light cruiser at 8,000 tons, 32 knots, 4 x 6" L/53 guns, 4 x 3" L/50 AA, 24 a/c. This would have fallen into a "loop hole" of the Washington Treaty, where carriers UNDER 10,000 tons without 8" guns were not regulated. The Japanese tried to exploit this "loop hole" with IJNS Ryujo, but a failure to constrain GNS demands and changes in the 1930 Treaty resulted in a carrier too large and no longer outside the restraints of the Treaty. Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, the USN had a program for converting passenger liners into auxiliary carriers. This program involved preparing plans, and acquiring catapults, elevators, and arrestor wires. These conversions were along the lines of the Japanese conversions to the Junyo class. The largest ship in the program was SS Leviathan, ex-Vaterland, built in 1914, coal-fired but according to some references, converted to oil firing when overhauled in 1922-23. She would have measured around 50,000 tons standard displacement on conversion, 26-27 knots, she was ~950 ft. long over all and 100 feet beam at the waterline and would have had 8 x 6" L/50 and 8-3" L/50 and later 5" L/25 AA guns. She would have been bulged for stability and better protection against torpedoes and she would have featured a flight deck of 900 feet by 105 feet. The other available liners were not as impressive, but a number of 20-21 knot passenger liners from 580 to 720 feet long were built in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Aviation (seaplane) tenders were seen as also essential, supporting flying boats and floatplanes at advanced bases. The PBY was intended as much as a level bomber as a patrol/scout a/c. Unlike the common belief, the USN was very aviation minded between the wars, within the strategic, operational and tactical context of War Plan Orange.
The USN, always considering its need for endurance for its advance across the Pacific in a "Warplan Orange" and impressed by the RN's large trade protection cruisers ("Elizabethans"), had already been developing designs for 8" gun cruisers. Remember that the USN and RN shared a massive amount of information, even cross posting designers, like Goddard, and exchanging plans, including HMS Hood. Apparently, documents indicate that the USN and RN were already sharing information from 1915 on, and continued to share information after the war, until a bunch of Anglophobic officers gained control of the USN in the mid-1920s. These were the designs that ended in the Pensacola class. This was mirrored by the developments in the IJN, though for different operational and tactical reasoning. Had the armored cruisers been rebuilt, they would have been used as flagships for "distant" forces, such as the Asian/Far East Squadron and in war, would have escorted the battle line, allowing the heavy cruisers to continue to escort the carriers. They would also be the primary bombardment force for opposed amphibious landings, which in USN doctrine between the wars, usually consisted of light cruisers. Initially, carrier groups were not imagined as including destroyers due to the limitations of the "four pipers", so that only carriers and heavy cruisers were operating together. The new fleet destroyers built from the early 1930s had the endurance to escort the carriers, along with under-way replenishment. The use of a very effective gun (5" L/38 Mk.12) and fire control (Mk.33 and Mk.37 systems) combination made escorting destroyers even more valuable. Thanks to the NWC gaming, the USN realized early that tying the carriers to the battle line was a death sentence for the carriers. Carriers needed to be free to operate against their opposite numbers to attain and maintain air superiority over the Fleet. One reason the battle line was in Pearl Harbor on 7 Dec 41, was that Kimmel felt uncomfortable going to sea without his carriers, one which was in Puget Sound for a scheduled overhaul and the other two delivering land-based a/c, fighters to Wake and scout-bombers to Midway on HIS orders.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Apr 9, 2021 12:29:06 GMT -6
V1.0 is released All nation's starts are complete with all 7 fleets complete in each one Any feedback? Just some minor data issues - Tonnage figures are neither standard displacement, nor light displacement, nor trials displacement nor full load. Given you are starting with the Washington Treaty in effect, standard displacement should be used. South Carolina and Michigan had been de-commissioned before the Treat went into effect, 15 Dec 1921, 11 Feb 1922. These days when a ship was "decommissioned", there was no "mothballing". The ship was pulled up to a pier in a yard or base, the tompions put in the guns, maybe canvas stretched over the stacks and ventilators, the doors, windows and ports dogged and the crew re-assigned. Any outstanding maintenance and repairs were documented and the funds turned off. Congress started cutting funding right after the war and funds and crews were needed for the new generation of ultra-dreadnoughts. Someone would come by everyday to make sure the ship was still afloat. Within a year, the ship would require a good deal of extra maintenance before it could be put back into service. Such ships would become parts stores quickly. As far as these two ships and the pre-dreadnoughts, they retained little or no combat value in a world of 45,000 ton ultra-dreadnoughts with 16" and 18" guns and there were plenty of war built merchant ships to use as auxiliaries. In time of war, their steel would be more valuable than the ships. All these ships were scrapped in 1923 without a tear drop. Delaware and North Dakota were declared at 20,000 standard tons. Florida and Utah at 21,825 st. Wyoming and Arkansas at 26,000 tons. Looking back, it just doesn't make sense why the Navy kept these ships. The two possible opponents had battle lines with 13.5" and 14" guns with elevations of at least 20 degrees. They were out-gunned in shell weight and range. The US delegation at Washington should have been negotiating someway to trade them, say at a 2 to 1 tonnage ratio for Washington. They were little better than obsolescent. What was worse was that the Navy then spent precious funds to rebuild the last four, even when they didn't increase gun elevation to at least 30,000 yards, which became standard for the rest of the battle line. New York and Texas at 27,000 tons. Both could make but not sustain 21 knots for more than eight hours due to their VTE machinery. Though they had VTE, their pre-"all or nothing" armor scheme and lack of gun elevation made them less valuable. In 1920-21, the Navy studied 'shoehorning' a BB-49 turbo-electric plant into the hull. It just fit lengthwise, but actual gave space on each beam for additional anti-torpedo bulkheads, which meant bulges would still have been needed when they were rebuilt to off-set the additional armor as the TE plant weighed as much as the coal-fired VTE. Had they been given additional gun elevation, they would have been a fast-wing of the Fleet, since they were intended to use only half power normally (~30,000 shp), but full power in war (nominal 60,000 shp, but probably over 70,000 given the performance of the plant in the Lexington and Saratoga), which would have given them at least 25 knots. Nevada and Oklahoma, 27,500 tons. Nevada made 20.5 knots on trial and really was good for barely 20 knots at battle load. Oklahoma made just over 20 knots and was good for 19 knots. Like New York and Texas, her VTE machinery would vibrate to pieces if run at high RPM to long. The Navy had saved the prototype geared turbines from the Delaware when she was scrapped, so why they didn't pull the VTE and drop them in is a question. It would have been a better use of funds than rebuilding Florida and Utah. She would have had slightly better performance than Nevada. The Navy looked at dropping the BB-49 plant into these ships, but they were too small. Still, a half-plant (~33,000 shp) with two shafts should have been possible. These ships introduced the "all or nothing" and the "raft body" concepts. Most people know about the "all or nothing", but the "raft body" was just as important. Essentially the USN armored the sides of their ships to enclose magazines and machinery with belt armor, armored transverse bulkheads and armor decks. The theory was that the ship could flood in her unprotected spaces and still retain enough buoyancy to float and protected machinery to get her back to an advanced fleet base for intermediate repairs. Pennsylvania and Arizona were 31,400 tons New Mexico, Idaho and Mississippi at 32,000 tons, 21 knots, New Mexico had the prototype turbo-electric plant. Gun elevation was still 15 degrees, which meant they and the earlier ships were limited to the visual horizon (22,000-26,000 yards from 100'). Tennessee and California, 32,300 tons. Both were completed and in service. The "ultimate" "Standard" battleship and first of the "Big Five". The improved cage masts could handle the weight of the fire control positions. California had the last "pre-synchro" fire control system. There was a main gun director in the top cupola on each mast, and a secondary director on each beam in the next level down. They were given the first tachymetric AA fire controls in the Mk.19. All BBs had their AA batteries doubled to 8-3" L/50 Mk.10 AA guns and then to 8-5" L/25 Mk.10/11 AA guns when rebuilt or in the late 1920s and early 1930s. They also got a stern catapult and crane in the 1920s and then a second catapult on No.3 turret during the late 1920s and early 1930s. Normal complement was 2-3 observation floatplanes. This was considered an essential mod. Even the unmodified ships could use aerial spotting, when a smoke screen was laid between the opposing battle lines, blinding the enemy. Colorado, Maryland and West Virginia, 32,600 tons. Maryland was in service. Colorado, West Virginia and Washington were due for completion in 1923. As stated earlier, the US should have fought to keep Washington by trading 12" gun tonnage as neither the British or Japanese had 12" gun ships in their battle lines by 1 January 1922. The Treaty ratio could have been used to justify five 16" gun ships and allow Japan three, while letting the Brits build four. The Japanese cheated on the Treaty from the start when the declared Akagi and Kaga at 26,900 tons when they were actually over 30,000 tons standard displacement. Claiming 22.5 knots for the Tosa as they did for the Nagato and Mutsu would allow them to rate Tosa at 35,000 metric tons, perhaps dropping a turret, which with its barbette, machinery and ammo probably weighed in at around 2,000 tons. All battleships carried a fixed TT on each beam, firing the Mk.9 "short" torpedo, 210lbs TNT, 9,000 yards at 27 knots. Also building and scrapped under the Treaty: South Dakota, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina, Iowa and Massachusetts. These ships would have been completed between 1924 and 1925, or perhaps later as Congress was cutting back funding the armed forces. Massachusetts was only less than 12% complete, so maybe she could have been re-armed with 8 x 18" L/50 guns. The prototype gun would have been proofed in 1923-24. Otherwise these ships would come out looking like their final design. The Navy was satisfied with the new heavier cage masts, Colorado and Maryland keeping their's until they were scrapped after WW2. Or she could have traded No.3 turret for longer machinery spaces and a half 'Lexington' plant, ~100,000 shp which might have pushed her 25 knots. These ships came in at around 39,000 - 40,000 tons, standard displacement. One game all the navies played was to design ammo storage for say 120 rounds and then declare 100 rounds as "ready for war". This shaved 240 tons off BB-49. The USN also didn't count the weights of catapults, aircraft and crane as technology not in general use at the time the Treaty was signed. So they also lumped AA fire control in this category. The BB-49 design could have been made to fit 35,000 tons. Drop the No.4 turret, barbette, machinery and ammo and lower No.3 to the quarterdeck. Backing out the protective and armor decks over the hole where No.4 had been and you saved ~3,000 tons. Reduce the ammo loadout, reduce the secondary to 10 x 6" L/53 Mk.12, do a little constructive "book-keeping" and you got in under the Treaty limits and still had your 3,000 tons for mods. Lexington, Saratoga, Ranger, United States, Constellation and Constitution - Around 40,000-41,000 tons standard, 33 knots, 8 x 16" L/50, 16 x 6" L/53, 8 x 3" L/50 AA, 4 x 21" fixed TT on each beam. Fired standard Mk.11, 500lbs TNT, 6,000 at 46 kts, 10,000 at 34 kts and 15,000 yards at 27 kts. Constellation was furthest along at under 23%. They were scheduled for completion between 1925-26, but reduced budgets meant it might be 1926-27. This gave some flexibility for mods, such as going to three three gun turrets, getting an extra gun for the same weight and a reduced length and citadel. Or about 4,000 tons of additional armor could be added, reducing speed by one knot. Keep in mind that the USN did not consider these ships battle cruisers in the sense of the British and Germans. They were "large scout cruisers" which defined their mission. They were to support the "Omahas" and DDs in fighting for information as scouts and deny that information to the enemy. The USN looked at converting them to carriers before the Treaty, as aircraft were steadily taking over the scouting mission, except in bad weather and at night, when such ships would still be needed. The USN in 1922 was very air minded. The NWC had gamed carriers from 1918 in the annual war games, using British information on their carriers and designs. Aerial spotting was considered critical. Battleship floatplanes could do this, but fighters were needed to attain and maintain air superiority so they could operate. Fighters were becoming to heavy for the turret platforms, so flight decks were needed. Bombers came next, as sinking the other side's carriers would go far towards gaining air supremacy. The NWC informed the General Board that the ideal carrier was around 27,000 tons, made better than 30 knots, was armored against and carried 6" guns and carried between60 to 72 aircraft. The Navy requested carriers as their No.1 priority in the 1920 through 1922 budget submissions. The USN was prepared to convert two to carriers even before the Treaty and maybe even more. BB1918 - Congress authorized but did not fund TEN more capital ships in 1918. These would have been around 50,000 tons, 12 x 16" L/50 Mk.1, 13.5 or even 16" belt, Lexington machinery with a speed around 30 knots, laid down after the Lexingtons were launched, in other words between 1922-1924. Certainly these might get tower bridges, 18" guns or other mods. David Brown claims that the Treaty saved the USN from completing twelve ships inferior to their British and Japanese contemporaries. I'm not sure this is true relative to the Japanese, but I admit that it looks true considering the G3 and N3. None of the navies really had good intel on each other's building programs, especially that of Japan. But there were other factors. For the British, they had reached the limits of their shipbuilding. There were only four slips that could build ships the size of G3 and N3 and this is as big as they got. Britain was facing a severe budget and economic problem with its war debt, most of which was held by US banks. The first four G3s would have been laid down in 1922 but were postponed for the Treaty conference. That means they would complete in 1926, with four N3s being laid down in 1924 and completed in 1928. There were only five dry docks in this period throughout the Empire that could support ships of this size. The Japanese were in worse shape as their economy had expanded providing economic support to the Allies and the war was over causing a budgetary and economic crisis. Their infrastructure restrictions were a launch displacement of 40,000 tons and 33 feet draft. It took a massive investment between 1930 and 1937 to improve this to 55,000 tons and 35 feet. The No.13 class was the limit for Japanese capital ships. The Japanese could complete two ships every eighteen months and lost Amagi to the earthquake of 1923. This meant they would, from 1923, complete Kaga, Tosa, Akagi, Takao, Atago, Owari and Kii by 1928. So let's review the situation. In comparison, the US had six slips able to build ships equivalent to the Panama Canal restrictions. The South Dakotas and Lexingtons would be complete by 1927. Six of the BB1918 BBs would be on the slips for completion between 1928-1929, with four more laid down in 1926-27 when the first six were launched. The US would, not including the four Colorados, have built 18 16" gun ships, six of them the BB1918 design by 1929. The British would get four G3 and Four N3 by 1928. The Japanese would have eight by 1929. The US could convert all six Lexingtons to carriers and still have ten 16" gun ultra-dreadnoughts on hand with four building against eight British with four building and eight Japanese with two building. The first No.13 wouldn't complete before 1931. Of the pre-dreadnoughts, all were decommissioned. New Hampshire, Minnesota, Vermont, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Virginia, Georgia, New Jersey, Ohio and Maine were still afloat, but really of little combat value, with the rest having no combat value at all in an "Orange War". Kearsarge was already converted to a crane ship and Kentucky was programmed for conversion. These were all coal burners with VTE machinery. References are Silverstone's "New Navy" and Friedman's "Design History of US Battleships", David Brown's 'Nelson to Vanguard' and 'Grand Fleet' and Conway's Warships series. The monitor Cheyenne had been reduced to a training ship, IX 4, Monadnock was IX 17, the rest were scrapped or rusting pier side. Of the armored cruisers, all had been decommissioned or disposed of. The survivors of the "Big Eight" (Seattle, Charlotte, Missoula (Tennessee class - 15,000 tons, 22 knots, 4 x 10" L/40, 4 x 6" L/50, 10 x 3" L/50 SP, 2 x 3" L/50 AA and 2 x 21" TT, Huron, Frederick, Pueblo, Huntington and Pittsburg (Pennsylvania class - 14,300 tons, 22 knots (reduced for Pittsburg to 13,700 tons, 18 knots at 18 knots) 4 x 8" L/45, 4 x 6" L/50, 10 x 3" L/50 SP, 2 x 3" L/50 AA, 2 x 21" TT)) were still afloat. Pueblo was a receiving ship, Huron was the Asian Sqdn flagship, 1919-1926 and then Pittsburg, 1927-1931. Pittsburgh had her forward funnel and boilers removed, down to 18 knots in 1927. All but Seattle were gone by 1931, with Seattle as IX 39. Rochester (CA-2) was off Nicaragua from 1926-31 and in the Far East from 1932-33, being stricken in 1938 and used as block ship in Subic Bay in 1941. She displaced 8,500 tons until 1924 when she lost her forward funnel and boilers, reducing speed from 20 knots to 16. 4 x 8" L/45 Mk.6, 8 x 3" L/50 Mk.9, 2 x 3" L/50 AA until 1924, when the SP 3" were removed. The Japanese did pretty much the same to their armored cruisers with improved guns, reduced boilers and speed and use as flagships and fire support off the Chinese coast. The USN seriously considered rebuilding these ships with bulges, new oil-fired machinery (speed 26-27 knots), tripods, new fire control and increased turret elevation, 30 degrees, pushing max new gun ballistic range to 30,000 yards. All 3" would be removed, Mk.19s shipped along with 8 x 5" 25 AA. These ships did not count against the Treaty. Of the "protected" cruisers, Charleston (CA-19), 10,300 tons, 22 knots, 12-6" L/50, 4- 3" L/50, 2 - 3" L/50 AA (St. Louis was decom, both were gone by 1930); Galveston (CL-19), Tacoma (CL-20, lost in 1924), 3,300 tons, 16.5 knots, 8-5" L/50, 1-3" L/50 AA (Denver, Chattanooga, Des Moines, Cleveland were decom, all were gone by 1933); Albany (CL-23) 3,600 tons, 20 knots, 8-5" L/50, 1-3" L/50 AA (decom in 1922, joining New Orleans, both gone by 1930), Olympia (CL-15), 6,100 tons, 20 knots, 4-8" L/35, 10-5" L/51 were still in service. Baltimore (12 x 6" L/40, 6 x 3" L/50 SP, 250 mines, 4,500 tons, 18-19 knots, stricken 1937) and San Francisco (4,500 tons, 19 knots, 8 x 5" L/51, 300 mines, renamed Yosemite in 1931, stricken 1937) were converted to cruiser-minelayers (CM), were decom. Scout cruisers included the ten Omaha class, all still building at this point, completing in 1923-25, 7,050 tons, 33-35 knots,12 x 6" L/53, 4 x 3" L/50 AA, 10 x 21" TT (2 x 3 deck mounts, 2 x 1 fixed either beam). Received two catapults and two scout floatplanes in the late 1920s and the fixed TT removed. Chester, Salem and Birmingham were decom, 4,100 tons, 25-26 knots (Birmingham had VTE and struggled to get to 24 knots), 4 x 5" L/51, 2 x 3" L/50 SP, 1 x 3" L/50 AA, 2 x 21" fixed TT. Langley was in commission and Lexington and Saratoga on the stocks. The new standard I'm using for all my starts is full load displacement, as that's what the ship designer appears to use Thank you for the other data, I'll take it all into consideration for the next update, especially with regards to ship completion times |
|
|
|
Post by exltcmts on Apr 10, 2021 3:53:22 GMT -6
Just another thought. Most people, like Drachfinel, think the "Tillman" battleships were "fantasy" design exercises to keep a powerful politician happy. The truth is that if Congress had been willing to fund them, all the designs were within the industrial capacity of the US as of 1921-22, the earliest point at which designs, contracts and materiel procurement could be completed. USN infrastructure would have had to be expanded, but they fit through the Canal and there was 4-6 drydocks on the East Coast and two on the West Coast that could handle them and Pearl Harbor got a large enough dry dock in 1919. The USN had ~480,000 tons building between 1920-21. If those resources had been directed into "Tillman" class BBs, they could build eight of 60,000 tons every four years or six of 80,000 tons every five, given the level of funding for the 1916 program. There were six building slips, 2 in Philadelphia NYD, 2 at Newport News, and one each at Fore River and NY NYD that could handle them and they would launch at 2.5 years after being laid down. The 18" L/50 Mk.1 would have been proofed earlier but not before 1920. The USN completed 96 16" L/50 Mk.2 guns between 1920-1923 ay the Washington Naval Factory and at the Army's Watervliet Arsenal. So production of an alternate 18" gun would produce about 80 guns in the same period, so enough guns would be produced to arm a "Tillman IV" by 1924. The six nominal 180,000 shp turbo-electric plants would have completed by 1924 (three were complete in 1923). So it was very much doable.
|
|
|
|
Post by exltcmts on Apr 10, 2021 3:58:48 GMT -6
The USN, faced with the distances of the Pacific, often operated at "emergency" full load displacement, which meant belts were barely above the waterline at best. "Battle" displacement was essential "standard" with fuel and stores added and then reduced to 2/3ds to represent consumption during movement to the battle area. "Standard" was supposed to be the ship "ready for war" as defined in the Treaty, with all ammo, crew and stores, but no fuel or reserve feed water. So adding fuel and reserve water should have been "full" load, but as I posted above, all the navies played games with the rules and there are discrepancies between this measurement and declared full load displacements.
|
|
|
|
Post by exltcmts on Apr 10, 2021 6:44:38 GMT -6
Question? Can you modify the gun data? I opened the gundata file in Word and added specific US guns as 16US1 (US 16" Mk.1 L/45, 2100lb APHE, 29"/736mm pen of vertical Krupp cemented at muzzle) or 14US1 (14" Mk.2 L/45, 1400lb APHE, 26"/673mm) and then modified the Pennsylvania file in the Saved Game 6 to include the new data and got an error message in the game. Problem here is not all guns of a bore are the same. For example, the USN 16" L/45 Mk.1 in the Colorados fired a 2,100lbs APHE at 30 degrees to 34,400 yards and (theoretically) penetrated a 736mm thick vertical plate of Krupp cemented armor at the muzzle or 220mm at max range. The 16" Mk.2 L/50 which would have armed the 1916 program fired the same shell at 40 degrees to 39,600 yards and penetrated a 812mm plate or 264mm of deck, while the Japanese 41cm L/45 Type 3 fired a 2,205lb shell at 33 degrees to 34,400 yards and penetrated a 751mm vertical plate and 198mm deck and the British 16" L/45 Mk.I which would have armed G3 and armed "Nelson" and "Rodney" fired a 2,048lbs shell at 40 degrees to 39,780 yards and penetrated 729mm and a 264mm deck. The British adopted a light shell after misanalyzing firing trials against ex-SMS Baden and had problems with "slamming", erosion, salvo spreads and accuracy throughout the life of the gun. Adopting a shorter, heavier shell at lower velocities (2,250lbs was proposed, 39,090 yds, 751/281mm) would have corrected these problems though a shorter shell could have caused problems in the shell lift. The Japanese adopted a shell (2,249lbs Type 91) optimized for underwater hits with a flat nose under the ballistic and piercing caps, 41,600 yds at 43 degrees) when the "Nagato" class was rebuilt (1936) which reduced penetration against armor (711mm vertical and 306mm horizontal). The USN adopted a "heavy" shell in the early-mid 1930s, 2,240lbs, which changed the performance of the Mk.1 to 35,000 yds, 737/208mm and the Mk.2 (adopted as a coastal gun) to 42,100 yds, 788/290mm. The later Mk.6 L/45 (1939) was 36,900 yds, 740/341mm and the Mk.7 L/50 (1943) was 42,345 yds, 827/370mm with the 2,700lbs "superheavy" shell. The British 16" Mk.II L/45 (1941) which would have gone into "Lion" was 40,560 yds at 752/297mm with a 2,345lbs shell. The German 40.6cm SKC/34 (L/47) (1941) fired a 2,271lbs shell to 39,800 yds with 799/228mm penetration. Finally the Soviet 40.6cm L/50 for the "Sovyetski Soyuz" (1942) fired a 2,443lbs shell to 46,800 yds at 846/366mm. So, again, you can see that not all 16" guns are equal.
Going back to the discussion about the "Cherry Trees", the designs scrapped at Washington, compare the US 16" Mk.2, which had too light a shell and with the spacing of the guns, probably would have had wide salvo spreads, even with delay coils, but did not suffer from the issues the British 16" Mk.I did, nor from the ammo loading problems from magazine to turret, which reduced the rate of fire and were never really fixed. For the USN, adopting the "heavy" shell (2,240lbs) and lower velocities, along with chamber redesign and delay coils, would have made the 16" Mk.2 a very good gun, given the excellent reputation the gun built with the US Army. The British 18" Mk.II in N3 would have had the same problems. Given the British never found the funds to go to a heavier shell which would have gone far to fixing their issues, the N3 and G3 would never generate the expected levels of firepower. One has to wonder if this had something to do with the RN deciding in the early 1930s that 12,000-15,000 yds was the "decisive" range and led them to pretty much abandon aerial spotting. The Japanese 41cm Type 3 gun evidently performed well enough and the 46cm Type 3 for the No.13 would have probably been the same. Again, adopting the Type 91 shell lowered normal performance for a long chance underwater shot into the enemy's magazines and the rebuild to 43 degrees elevation gave the Japanese a ~7,000 yds range advantage if they could exploit it with aerial spotting.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Apr 10, 2021 15:13:49 GMT -6
Question? Can you modify the gun data? I opened the gundata file in Word and added specific US guns as 16US1 (US 16" Mk.1 L/45, 2100lb APHE, 29"/736mm pen of vertical Krupp cemented at muzzle) or 14US1 (14" Mk.2 L/45, 1400lb APHE, 26"/673mm) and then modified the Pennsylvania file in the Saved Game 6 to include the new data and got an error message in the game. Problem here is not all guns of a bore are the same. For example, the USN 16" L/45 Mk.1 in the Colorados fired a 2,100lbs APHE at 30 degrees to 34,400 yards and (theoretically) penetrated a 736mm thick vertical plate of Krupp cemented armor at the muzzle or 220mm at max range. The 16" Mk.2 L/50 which would have armed the 1916 program fired the same shell at 40 degrees to 39,600 yards and penetrated a 812mm plate or 264mm of deck, while the Japanese 41cm L/45 Type 3 fired a 2,205lb shell at 33 degrees to 34,400 yards and penetrated a 751mm vertical plate and 198mm deck and the British 16" L/45 Mk.I which would have armed G3 and armed "Nelson" and "Rodney" fired a 2,048lbs shell at 40 degrees to 39,780 yards and penetrated 729mm and a 264mm deck. The British adopted a light shell after misanalyzing firing trials against ex-SMS Baden and had problems with "slamming", erosion, salvo spreads and accuracy throughout the life of the gun. Adopting a shorter, heavier shell at lower velocities (2,250lbs was proposed, 39,090 yds, 751/281mm) would have corrected these problems though a shorter shell could have caused problems in the shell lift. The Japanese adopted a shell (2,249lbs Type 91) optimized for underwater hits with a flat nose under the ballistic and piercing caps, 41,600 yds at 43 degrees) when the "Nagato" class was rebuilt (1936) which reduced penetration against armor (711mm vertical and 306mm horizontal). The USN adopted a "heavy" shell in the early-mid 1930s, 2,240lbs, which changed the performance of the Mk.1 to 35,000 yds, 737/208mm and the Mk.2 (adopted as a coastal gun) to 42,100 yds, 788/290mm. The later Mk.6 L/45 (1939) was 36,900 yds, 740/341mm and the Mk.7 L/50 (1943) was 42,345 yds, 827/370mm with the 2,700lbs "superheavy" shell. The British 16" Mk.II L/45 (1941) which would have gone into "Lion" was 40,560 yds at 752/297mm with a 2,345lbs shell. The German 40.6cm SKC/34 (L/47) (1941) fired a 2,271lbs shell to 39,800 yds with 799/228mm penetration. Finally the Soviet 40.6cm L/50 for the "Sovyetski Soyuz" (1942) fired a 2,443lbs shell to 46,800 yds at 846/366mm. So, again, you can see that not all 16" guns are equal. Going back to the discussion about the "Cherry Trees", the designs scrapped at Washington, compare the US 16" Mk.2, which had too light a shell and with the spacing of the guns, probably would have had wide salvo spreads, even with delay coils, but did not suffer from the issues the British 16" Mk.I did, nor from the ammo loading problems from magazine to turret, which reduced the rate of fire and were never really fixed. For the USN, adopting the "heavy" shell (2,240lbs) and lower velocities, along with chamber redesign and delay coils, would have made the 16" Mk.2 a very good gun, given the excellent reputation the gun built with the US Army. The British 18" Mk.II in N3 would have had the same problems. Given the British never found the funds to go to a heavier shell which would have gone far to fixing their issues, the N3 and G3 would never generate the expected levels of firepower. One has to wonder if this had something to do with the RN deciding in the early 1930s that 12,000-15,000 yds was the "decisive" range and led them to pretty much abandon aerial spotting. The Japanese 41cm Type 3 gun evidently performed well enough and the 46cm Type 3 for the No.13 would have probably been the same. Again, adopting the Type 91 shell lowered normal performance for a long chance underwater shot into the enemy's magazines and the rebuild to 43 degrees elevation gave the Japanese a ~7,000 yds range advantage if they could exploit it with aerial spotting. Guns, unfortunately, are not mod-able in that way you can change penetration, max, range, and ROF, but not shell weight and any changes apply to all ships with that calibre |
|
|
|
Post by exltcmts on Apr 11, 2021 3:46:47 GMT -6
OK, thanks. It would seem a simply mod just to adjust a add to the data list.
|
|
